I've been reading lately about Christ for some reason, and this reading has been mostly fictional. Ie. Christ has been a character in several stories I've read. So, it's not like what I've been reading is doctrine.
And I've realised that I have formed an opinion about Christ that colours my perception of what I'm reading, and that that opinion has no basis in fact. You'll say: it is natural that reading fiction has influenced your fictional opinion of Christ. But I have the feeling that my opinion of Christ originates from something I have read before this fiction that I have read recently. Because my opinion conflicts with the character of Christ in the fiction.
The opinion I have formed is that Christ was naïve. Perhaps this does not conflict with doctrine, when examined closely. I wouldn't know: I don't know doctrine. But I do feel that this opinion conflicts with the church that arose upon Christ's message. What I mean is that Christ's message is inappropriate to this world, and only a naïve person could accept that following his proposal would actually work.
A lot of my memories are suddenly coming together. I remember that Yourcenar puts this same opinion in Emperor Hadrian's mouth. The reason why Christ's plan would not work is that, although it is based on the-- the-- astonishing power of humility and compromise (I should just say "love" I guess), it does not take into account those people who take advantage of the humility of others. Ie. Christ's plan works as long as everyone agrees to love each other, but all it takes is one mean guy to take advantage of the loving-people, and the whole thing fails.
To put it in one sentence, the opinion I have somehow lately formed on Christ, from reading I suppose heathen works on Christ, is that his proposal will never succeed. And thus the opinion I'm forming of fiction that portrays Christ as a triumphant character whose plan only needs time to succeed is that this fiction is itself naïve.
Whether or not you agree and whether or not my incumbent opinion is valid, I would still like to know where it came from. I believe that a series of ideas has led me to juxtapose the idea of the "leader" with the idea of "Christ", and I have been led to judge the latter infavourably with respect to the ideal characteristics of the former.
